Heartland Center for Occupational Safety and Health

ABSTRACT Background: Kelman’s Processes of Change suggest that individuals participate in behaviors for one of three reasons: because it is required (compliance), because the behavior allows them to maintain a particular social status (identification), or because the behavior aligns with the individuals core beliefs (internalization). This study aims to assess the utility of this model in understanding farmers’ attitudes and behaviors regarding power take-off (PTO) shielding to prevent entanglements. Methods: Surveys collected data on 673 farmers’ attitudes and behaviors related to PTO shielding in 14 highly agricultural counties of New York. Participants were classified based on Kelman’s Processes of Change. Results: In total, 59.44% of participants could be classified into one of the three Kelman categories based on both attitude and behavior. Of these participants, 18% were classified in the compliance phase, 3% in identification, and 79% in internalization. Of participants who did not display appropriate shielding behavior, 77% still reported having internalized the importance of PTO shielding. Conclusions: Two main challenges occurred in using Kelman’s Processes of Change to assess PTO shielding behaviors among farmers. First, the attitude and behaviors of participants were not always reflective of one another, and second, participants tended to have difficulties distinguishing their primary motivations for PTO shielding (compliance, identification, or internalization). Though participants can be classified based on Kelman’s Processes of Change and researchers can benefit from a more in-depth understanding of motivations related to changing safety behaviors, this study indicates that there are challenges in accurately assigning individuals to their appropriate “change” classification.

Falls overboard are the most common cause of fatalities in commercial fishing. As a result, interventions aimed at increasing and measuring the use of personal flotation devices (PFDs) are a high priority. The focus of this study was to explore the use of accelerometers as a means for objectively measuring PFD use on lobster fishing vessels. For participating vessels, researchers attached an accelerometer to a PFD worn by a crewmember and another to the vessel's wheelhouse. GoPro videos were also employed to record crewmember activities so these could be synchronized with accelerometer outputs. Accelerometer outputs included two distinct measures, the proportional integration mode (PIM) and zero crossing mode (ZCM). Data were fitted to various equations to identify the best method for predicting PFD use. Seven lobster fishing vessels participated in the trial. Data indicated that accelerometers could predict PFD use with a fairly high degree of accuracy. In particular, a logistic equation incorporating PIM values from the PFD and the absolute value of the difference between the PFD PIM readings and the PIM readings from the stationary accelerometer demonstrated the highest degree of accuracy, with correct classifications for 73.3% to 77.6% of the 10-second data intervals. Accuracy was highest when crew members were moving versus stationary. The predictive value of ZCM was comparatively limited. PIM accelerometer readings can be used to measure PFD use with a considerably high degree of accuracy, especially for sternmen who are moving regularly and have the highest risk for falling overboard.

This study explored perspectives of Northeast commercial lobstermen regarding the use of personal flotation devices (PFDs). Researchers sought to identify factors contributing to low PFD use, and motivators that could lead to increased use of PFDs. This qualitative research (n = 72) included 25 commercial fishermen who participated in in-depth, semi-structured interviews, and 47 attendees of Lobstermen's meetings who engaged in focus groups. The results showed substantial barriers to PFD use. Fishermen described themselves as being proactive about safety whenever possible, but described a longstanding tradition of not wearing PFDs. Key factors integrally linked with the lack of PFD use were workability, identity/social stigma, and risk diffusion. Future safety interventions will need to address significant barriers to PFD use that include issues of comfort and ease of use, as well as social acceptability of PFDs and reorientation of risk perceptions related to falls overboard.